The Critical Need for Free Speech When the Outrage Is Justified

Sep 22, 2025 by AFP

This is a guest blog written by Brent Gardner, chief government affairs officer at Americans for Prosperity.

There are moments in our culture and our politics when the outrage is justified. This is one of them.

From government failures to social fractures, people are angry — and they should be. Outrage is not a defect in the body politic; it’s a sign that citizens still expect better from their leaders and their institutions. Moments of grief, anger, and sadness often expose the deep cracks in our system. They also test what kind of country we want to be.

In these moments, it’s tempting to look to government as both referee and enforcer. But history tells us plainly: when the levers of government are turned against speech in the name of order or fairness, they become weapons. And weapons are used at the worst possible times, against whichever side happens to be vulnerable in that moment.

What feels like a short-term fix quickly becomes a long-term threat.

That’s why free speech matters most when it’s hardest to defend.

It is easy to stand for free expression when we agree with the words being spoken. It is much harder when speech cuts against our own convictions, when it angers us, when it feels dangerous. But that is precisely when the First Amendment does its work. It forces us to respond not with suppression, but with persuasion; not with silencing, but with better arguments and stronger communities.

That requires civil discourse. Free speech isn’t meant to be a force that mandates a change of mind, but rather an opportunity to reflect on your position and engage a neighbor’s with respect and without fear of reprimand.

The stakes could not be higher. If we normalize government as the arbiter of acceptable speech — if we empower officials to decide which voices may be heard — then we should expect that power to be used against us when political winds shift. Many Americans, particularly conservatives, understand the frustration of having their views dismissed or delegitimized by the very institutions that ought to welcome debate.

We all experienced how that played out during the COVID pandemic when the government sought to stifle innovation and critical dialogue alike during that crisis. Free speech is not just a principle enshrined in parchment. It is a practical defense mechanism for a free people, a shield that protects us all from becoming tomorrow’s target.

We must recognize the anger of this age without giving in to its worst impulses. We must meet justified outrage with accountability, empathy, and above all, the commitment to preserve liberty. Because if we lose the freedom to speak in moments of crisis, we will lose the freedom to govern ourselves in moments of calm.